Tag Archives: Coup

Venezuela: US sending planes with guns, ammo and radios for President Maduro’s enemies

The weapons intercepted at Arturo Michelin airport in Venezuela from Miami on February 3, 2019. Photo: Venezuela Ministry of Interior, Justice and Peace.
  • Boeing 767 belonging to US freight company has made dozens of flights between Miami, Colombia and Venezuela since January 11
  • Official said materiel was ‘destined for criminal groups and terrorist actions’ and ‘financed by the fascist extreme right’ and the US government

Venezuelan authorities say a US-owned air freight company delivered a crate of assault weapons earlier this week to the international airport in Valencia to be used in “terrorist actions” against the embattled government of Nicolas Maduro.

An air freight company, 21 Air, based in Greensboro, North Carolina, operates the Boeing 767 aircraft the Venezuelans claim was used in the arms transfer. The flight originated in Miami on Sunday.

The Boeing 767 has made dozens of flights between Miami International Airport and destinations in Colombia and Venezuela since January 11, a flight tracking service shows, often returning to Miami for only a few hours before flying again to South America.

The discovery of the weapons was on Tuesday – two days after the flight landed briefly in Valencia, Venezuela’s third-largest city – as tax authorities and other inspectors conducted a routine inspection of cargo from the flight, according to a statement by the Carabobo state governor’s office.

Bolivarian National Guard General Endes Palencia Ortiz, Venezuela’s vice-minister of citizen security, said authorities found 19 assault weapons, 118 ammunition cartridges, and 90 military-grade radio antennas, among other items.

“This materiel was destined for criminal groups and terrorist actions in the country, financed by the fascist extreme right and the government of the United States,” Palencia Ortiz was quoted as saying.

The freight company, which started five years ago, operates two cargo planes, a Boeing 747 and a Boeing 767, according to the 21 Air website. The Boeing 767, a 32-year-old aircraft once flown by the now-defunct Brazilian carrier Varig, carries the registration N-881-YV and is the aircraft that landed in Valencia on Sunday.

The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent through its website. The mobile phone of the company’s chief executive, Michael Mendez, had a recording on Thursday afternoon that said it could not accept calls.

An Ottawa, Canada-based analyst of unusual ship and plane movements, Steffan Watkins, drew attention to the frequent flights of the 21 Air cargo plane in a series of tweets on Thursday.

“All year, they were flying between Philadelphia and Miami and all over the place, but all continental US,” Watkins said in a telephone interview. “Then all of a sudden in January, things changed.”

That is when the cargo plane began flying daily to destinations in Colombia and Venezuela and sometimes several times a day, Watkins said. The plane has made nearly 40 round-trip flights from Miami International Airport to Caracas and Valencia in Venezuela, and Bogota and Medellin in Colombia since January 11.

The most recent tracking of the aircraft showed it arrived from Medellin into Miami airport after midnight on Thursday.

The air cargo company’s website says the Boeing 767 has a payload capacity of 42 tons.

The aircraft in question has passed through many hands since Varig took delivery of it in 1987. In 2004, it was passed to GE Capital Aviation Services, a leasing company that is part of the General Electric conglomerate, according to an operator history on the planespotters.net website. Tampa Cargo, Avianca Cargo and Dynamic Airways later controlled the aircraft until 21 Air received it in 2014.

The provenance of the alleged weaponry was not apparent. And questions about who the arms shipment was destined for, if the Venezuelan version of events is true, only mounted. Delivery at a commercial airport would indicate somebody with authority there would have had a hand.

The weapons intercepted at Arturo Michelin airport in Venezuela from Miami on February 3, 2019. Photo: Venezuela Ministry of Interior, Justice and Peace.
The weapons intercepted at Arturo Michelin airport in Venezuela from Miami on February 3, 2019. Photo: Venezuela Ministry of Interior, Justice and Peace.

Venezuelan authorities displayed the weaponry they said was delivered by the 21 Air cargo plane on open-air tables draped in red cloth. Some of the rifles included stands for long-range targeting. The shipment included 15 AR-15 assault weapons, a Micro Draco semi-automatic pistol with a jumbo magazine, a Colt 7.62 rifle and two telescopic sights, the governor’s statement said.

The weapons intercepted at Arturo Michelin airport in Venezuela from Miami on February 3, 2019. Photo: Venezuela Ministry of Interior, Justice and Peace.
The weapons intercepted at Arturo Michelin airport in Venezuela from Miami on February 3, 2019. Photo: Venezuela Ministry of Interior, Justice and Peace.

Valencia was a former manufacturing and economic hub before the collapse of the nation’s economy.

Flight records from the tracking site flightradar24.com, monitored by Watkins, indicate the 21 Air cargo plane flew at least four times to Valencia from Miami and another four times to Caracas from Miami since January 11. In many cases, the flights would head on to Bogota or Medellin before returning to Miami.

If a US entity was trying to provide arms to a Venezuelan resistance movement, it would be taking a familiar page from the history books.

The CIA operated a dummy airline, known as Air America, from the early 1950s until the mid 1970s for air operations in Southeast Asia, including airdropping weapons to friendly forces.

More than a decade later, Sandinista soldiers shot down a cargo plane taking weapons to the US-backed Contra rebels fighting the Nicaraguan government. A US Marine veteran, Eugene Hasenfus, survived the 1986 crash and told reporters he was working for the CIA, paving the way for his release and return to the United States.

Curiously, one of the figures in the Ronald Reagan administration instrumental in delivering support to the contras, former assistant secretary of state Elliott Abrams, was named by President Donald Trump late last month as his special envoy overseeing policy towards Venezuela.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: Plane from Miami brought arms for ‘terrorist action’

From the Barracks to the Courtroom: US ‘Lawfare’ in Action

bolsonaro

Wayne Madsen | 18.01.2019

Somewhere along the line in recent history, some US think tank in the employ of the Central Intelligence Agency must have come up with the idea that overthrowing governments in Latin America by military coups came with bad optics for the coup plotters. Often, democratically-elected Latin American leaders were demonized by a cabal of military officers who left their barracks and laid siege to the presidential palaces. After taking control of the national radio stations, these generals would announce they had seized control of the government to “protect” the people from “communism” or some other concocted bogeyman.

Beginning in the early 2000s, another plan was devised by US national security planners ensconced in their faux academia “think tanks.” Their plan was simple: overthrow anti-American elected leaders in Latin America through the courts. In effect, lawyers and judges, not generals, caudillos, or military juntas, would carry out coups by abusing constitutional provisions and laws as a clever ruse.

Under Allen Dulles and Richard Helms, the Central Intelligence Agency relied on the old tried and true method of promoting coups via the façade of a “popular” rebellion. After the 1973 CIA-directed coup in Chile, which saw Socialist president Salvador Allende die in a hail of bullets fired from aircraft and tanks at the La Moneda presidential palace, the CIA began to look at other avenues to overthrow presidents in the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, CIA-influenced media, including the dubious Wikipedia, have insisted Allende committed suicide with an AK-47 assault rifle presented to him by Cuban leader Fidel Castro. However, nature would later provide the evidence that Allende was assassinated. The proof came in a 300-page top secret report found in the debris of the house of a former military officer. The house had been destroyed in the 2011 Chilean earthquake. The story of Allende’s “suicide” was spread around CIA-friendly media to mask the agency’s role in yet another assassination of a foreign leader. The CIA’s media manipulation was honed during its pre-eminent role in covering up the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, and Dr. Martin Luther King. For the CIA, however, assassinations were costly in terms of the agency’s public image, so some other method of dispatching targeted leaders was in order.

A formerly CONFIDENTIAL CIA “Intelligence Memorandum,” dated December 29, 1975, concluded that Latin America had to be weaned away from “Third Worldism.” The conclusion was based on the votes of certain Latin American countries that had voted in favor of a United Nations General Assembly resolution equating Zionism with racism. The countries were Brazil, Cuba, Grenada, Guyana, and Mexico. Eleven other countries in the Western Hemisphere abstained.

As the bloody coups in Chile, the Dominican Republic, and other countries showed, there had to be a simpler and less lethal way for the US to bring about undemocratic changes in governments in the hemisphere.

If the CIA were able to infiltrate a nation’s judiciary and law enforcement structures — the latter having already been thoroughly subsumed through CIA-financed “training programs” – it could bring spurious charges against targeted heads of state. This form of coup d’état would become known as “lawfare.”

The leader of the French left, Jean Luc Melenchon, recently condemned the use of lawfare against former Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Lula, as he is popularly known, has been imprisoned since April 2018 on trumped up charges of corruption. Melenchon told the Brazilian press that “lawfare is now used in all countries to get rid of progressive leaders. This is what they did with Lula.” Melenchon added, “the judge [Sergio Moro] who condemned Lula is now a minister [minister of justice and public security] of Jair Bolsonaro, the new president of Brazil.” Lula was sentenced to 12 years in prison on politically-motivated money-laundering charges ginned up by Moro and other neo-fascists in the Brazilian judiciary. Bolsonaro, a champion of Brazil’s former military dictatorship and an admirer of Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Donald Trump, has vowed to keep Lula in prison. Lula would have defeated Bolsonaro for the presidency had he been released from prison and allowed to run for political office. However, Moro and his fellow lawfare practitioners ensured that appeals to the Brazilian Supreme Court for Lula’s release were all dead-on-arrival.

Melenchon also stated “Lula has been a direct victim of accusations to destroy his work and image, built in more than 40 years of public life.” British human rights attorney Geoffrey Robertson QC echoed Melenchon in comments made to the “New Internationalist” in January 2018. Robertson cited the “extraordinarily aggressive measures” taken to imprison Lula and prevent him from running for president. Robertson cited as Lula’s enemies the judiciary, media, and “the great sinews of wealth and power in Brazil.”

Lawfare coups have been embraced by both Republican and Democratic administrations over almost two decades. The first example of a coup by semi-constitutional fiat was the February 28, 2004 forced removal from office of Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. US Marines and American mercenaries escorted Aristide and his party from the presidential palace to a white plane with no other markings except for an American flag on the tail. The United States claimed Aristide voluntarily resigned his office, something that Aristide and his advisers vehemently denied. Aristide was literally tossed off the plane, along with his wife, in Bangui, Central African Republic. Through the abuse of “national emergency” provisions, the United States installed Haiti’s Supreme Court Chief Justice, Boniface Alexandre, in the presidential palace. The coup began after CIA-supported rebels and narcotics-gangs seized control of northern Haiti and marched to the capital of Port-au-Prince with the intention of ousting Aristide.

The second lawfare coup was against Honduras’s president, Manuel Zelaya. Staged on June 28, 2009, the coup was approved in advance by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as leaked cables from the US embassy in Tegucigalpa attest. Coup leader Roberto Micheletti cited the Honduran Constitution and a decision by the Supreme Court as providing legitimacy for Zelaya being marched from his home in his pajamas to a waiting plane that flew him to Costa Rica. The military junta that replaced Zelaya said that his letter of resignation had been approved by the National Assembly. Zelaya declared the letter to be a forgery.

The third major lawfare coup came in 2012. Paraguay’s democratically-elected president, Fernando Lugo, was ousted in a political impeachment carried out by right-wing forces in the Paraguayan Congress and Senate, with the full support of the US-trained and equipped Paraguayan military. From Washington, Secretary Clinton moved hastily to recognize the right-wing vice president, Federico Franco, and his new right-wing government to replace the center-left government of Lugo. As with Haiti and Honduras, the Paraguayan coup was accomplished with the thin veneer of the constitution.

In 2016, it was Brazil’s turn in the lawfare arena. The impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff of the left-wing Workers’ Party ensured that Michel Temer, her right-wing vice president, assumed the presidency. Without Rousseff in the presidential palace, her predecessor, Lula, became fair game for the right-wing.

Next on the American hit list was Venezuela. On December 6, 2015, the US-backed rightist opposition won control over the National Assembly. The rightists immediately commenced procedures to remove progressive socialist President Nicolas Maduro from power through dubious “constitutional” means. However, the plan faltered in Venezuela. In reaction, Washington applied crippling economic sanctions on the country, something that was to be repeated by the Trump administration against both Venezuela and the democratically-elected government of President Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua.

Pro-democracy forces in Latin America and elsewhere no longer have to worry about sudden troop movements and tanks converging on presidential palaces, but armies of judges and lawyers armed with nothing more than constitutional provisions and criminal codes stretched to the point of incredulity.

The ‘Soft Coup’ and the Attack on the Brazilian People

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/06/22/the-soft-coup-and-the-attack-on-the-brazilian-people/

In 2016, when former President of Brazil Dilma Rousseff was removed from office, I asked my dad- a New Yorker who religiously reads the morning paper- what he thought about the political situation in Brazil. He had read a New York Times article about the alleged corruption scandal, about the mismanagement of money and how the greedy Workers’ Party had been stealing money from the Brazilian people. Sitting here in the US, this is the image of current Brazilian politics: greed, corruption, mismanagement, and embezzlement of funds. You hear of a leftist administration incapable of governing its people, of the poverty-stricken masses in need of salvation. That is, if you hear anything at all. According to this narrative, the new administration (the Brazilian Democratic Movement or MDB) took over to save the day and save the Brazilian people from government corruption. When Dilma was impeached on August 31, 2016, Temer- then Vice President- took over the Presidency.

Less than two years later, however, Michel Temer of the MDB holds the presidency with just a 5% approval rating. This makes Temer the least popular president in Brazilian history. Since his appointment, Temer has also been accused of corruption scandals, the alleged reason for which former president Rousseff was impeached, and the very reason that he assumed office. Every measure of social wellbeing has plummeted as Temer’s administration has passed sweeping austerity measures and cut funding the social programs implemented by the Workers’ Party that are credited with making Brazil a main power on the global stage, increasing social inclusion in higher education, growing the middle class, and decreasing hunger and homelessness (more on this later). Despite his abysmal approval rating, mass protests, public criticism, and a tanking economy, Temer is still in office. And now, the main leftist candidate, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (also known as Lula), who has consistently led in the polls by wide margins, is in prison serving a 12-year sentence for a legal proceeding that has yet to be concluded.

When we think of coups, most of us imagine an image of the past or, at the very least, a clear and undeniable use of force. Large guns. Military intervention. Blood. The brutal overthrow of an elected government. (Think: Chile in 1973, Honduras in 2009, Argentina in 1976). What has been deemed a ‘soft coup’ in Brazil in 2016 stems from the same motive—the protection of corporate, foreign, and imperialist interests over the interests of the poor and working people and their right to self-determination—but comes wrapped in more palatable packaging that makes it easier to deny the violation of democracy. As Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research discusses in their recent dossier “Lula: The Battle for Democracy in Brazil,” the foreign and national elite used a series of legally sanctioned measures to remove the Workers’ Party from office under the guise of corruption. Though the legal case against former president and current Presidential candidate Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and former President Dilma Rousseff is full of holes (a lack of evidence, unreliable and changing quid-pro-quo testimonies given in exchange for lighter sentences, illegal wiretapping, etc), it allowed the bourgeoise- operating through the Brazilian courts- a means to sentence Lula to prison and remove Dilma from power. Quoting law professor Carlos Lodi, Tricontinental defines lawfare as the ‘process of using the law to produce political results. Opponents are removed by use of the legal system rather than the constitutionally valid electoral process’. This is a major strategy behind Brazil’s ‘soft coup’ and the assault on Brazilian democracy.

During the ongoing legal battle, media giant Globo consistently and frequently produced news stories that validated the unproven corruption allegations against the Workers’ Party and presented a slanted perspective that set the stage for and legitimized the coup. According to scholar Teun A van Dijk, 45 of the 60 main front page headlines in Globo from March and April 2016- the months leading up to Dilma’s impeachment- were about Lula, Dilma, the PT, impeachment, or Dilma’s government. The slandering of the Workers’ Party, despite their vast social advances and the lack of evidence behind the legal claims, is reminiscent of other notable moments in Latin American history. Leading up to the violent overthrow of socialist Chilean president Salvador Allende in 1973, the CIA and other forces colluded to cause economic destabilization and chip away at Allende’s popularity in order to justify his removal from power and Chile’s realignment with the interests of foreign and domestic capital. Under these conditions, it was easier to oppress the masses and divert the social progress that Allende’s government had made. Forty-three years later in Brazil, the Brazilian and foreign bourgeoise- acting through media and legal channels- have sought to detract from the advances against hunger and poverty made by the Workers’ Party and use the alleged corruption scandals to regain power.

What does the right have to gain in arresting the country’s leading Presidential candidate, arguably one of the most popular historical figured in Brazilian history? What threat do Lula and the Workers’ Party represent to the Brazilian elite? The Workers’ Party dared to reclaim Brazil’s natural resources—mainly the pre-salt oil reserve—and invest it in the public good, rather than for the profit of the elite. During the thirteen years of the Workers’ Party administrations, from Lula’s election in 2002 to the ‘soft coup’ in 2016, the country experienced enormous gains in measures of social well-being. Under Lula, Brazil’s GDP increased by 20%, bringing the country from the 15th largest in 2002 to the 6th largest economy in the world by 2013. This gain was felt by Brazil’s poor and middle class and its most marginalized communities, with the per capita income increasing from $2,500 to $11,000 during the same period. Programs such as Bolsa Familia and Minha Casa, Minha Vida lifted 22 million people out of poverty, provided 2.6 million housing unit to 10 million low-income people, and halved the rate of extreme poverty. Not only did the number of public universities increase during this period (from 45 universities with 148 campuses in 2002 to 65 universities with 327 campuses in 2015), but scholarships and quotas also increased for marginalized black and indigenous communities, resulting in a 286% increase in afro-Brazilians attending institutes of higher education. The list goes on.

In a clear realignment away from a people’s agenda and towards the protection of capital interests and the status quo, since the coup in 2016 Temer’s administration has frozen investment in areas such as health and education for the next 20 years. As a result, unemployment rates, hunger, poverty, and infant mortality have already worsened, with infant mortality rates increasing for the first time in 13 years (for more on the impact of Temer’s austerity measures, read this study). In the words of Frente Brasil Popular in their Declaration to the Brazilian People,“They do not merely want to arrest Lula. They want to arrest the causes that he represents and defends: social inclusion and the promotion of the rights of the people, notably women, children, blacks, indigenous people, the LGBT population, people with special needs; the provision of living wages and the generation of jobs; support for small and medium-sized enterprises, family farming and agrarian reform; the defense of national sovereignty and the construction of a more equal and fairer country.”

Despite Lula’s popularity, his and his party’s undeniable success in improving social conditions in Brazil, and the oversights and legal breaches in the case against him, on April 5, 2018 Judge Sergio Moro denied a habeas corpus petition and demanded that Lula report to jail by 5pm the next day. Lula declared that he would turn himself in to jail to prove his innocence. Before turning himself in, Lula spoke to his supporters: “They don’t understand that there is no point in arresting me, because there are thousands and thousands of Lulas. There is no point in trying to end my ideas, they are already lingering in the air and you can’t arrest them…  They have to know that the death of a fighter cannot stop the revolution.”

To the Brazilian and foreign elite, impeaching Dilma and jailing Lula could represent a turn in the country’s investments (as we have seen with Temer’s subsequent austerity measures and labor reforms), an opening of Brazil’s resources to foreign investment and profits, and a realignment with a neoliberal agenda that places profits over people. The country has reacted with widespread protests, with Lula surrendering to Judge Moro’s prison mandate on the shoulders of thousands of Brazilian people. What will happen in the upcoming October election remains to be seen, with Lula still in prison and the people’s movements refusing the legitimize the soft coup, masked by questionable corruption allegations.

Celina Stien-della Croce is the Coordinator of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research.

Bob Fernandes Commentary – 18 June 2018

Bob Fernandes

On Friday, 4th March 2016. Lula is coerced to testify at the Federal Police. As he had not refused to testify, coercion without any sense.

Judge Moro said he had decided on the coercion to “avoid tumult”. At that time, there was a large pro-impeachment demonstration set for nine days later: March 13th.

There are no coincidences. There are tactics and strategy, politics and communication. The judiciary and the media feeding off each other. The co-action stirred up the news, people and the demonstration.

Only now, four years, three months and 227 coercitive arrests after the Supreme Court has decide: coercitive arrests are prohibited for questioning…

… There are no coincidences. Lula is in prison, and, albeit late, there is now the risk of affecting friends, colleagues.

There are no coincidences. Three days after that 13th of March Moro leaked a conversation between Dilma and Lula. Dilma was not under investigation. Therefore it was illegal.

And the recording went on for one hour more than the legal time limit set.

In the Supreme Court, Justices Teori Zavaski and Marco Aurelio Mello clearly defined that such actions were illegal.

But the Supreme Court did not act. Once again things had to be stirred up. There were huge repercussions from the leak and the conversations… and the Supreme Court impeded Lula from becoming a cabinet minister.

As a cabinet minister, Lula would have legal immunity, he would have been the political operator on the eve of the impeachment. Without Lula, o month later and Dilma was impeached in the lower house of Congress.

Eleven months afterwards, in a similar situation, the same Supreme Court would maintain Moreira Franco as minister.

Times of facility for some, and very hard for others. Times of labelling people to try and classify those who oppose the herds. Many have given up.

The law firm working for Lula had their telephone tapped. The operator confirmed the phone taps, according to Sergio Rodas on the site Consultor Juridico (Conjur).

The then rapporteur for Lava Jato, Teori Zavaski, reprehended Moro, Said Conjur. Moro alleged not knowing about the phone taps and “promised to destroy the recordings”.

They were not destroyed then. Only much later was this done.

Now, at the Brazilian Criminal Law Meeting, lawyer Valeska Teixeira Zanin Martins denounced:

… Moro made more than 400 recorded conversations of ours available… there are no precedents of such a violent attitude, such an anti-democratic one in democratic countries.

This was how the prosecutors and Police had access to the defence strategies…

There are no coincidences.

Watch the original in Portuguese here.

Moro, the Clean Hands Judge, going to s**t!

moro_detonador_vitort-740x555

By Emanuel Cancella

I am an admirer of the poet Gentileza and really believe that kindness (gentileza) generates  kindness, but not with Judge Moro, who has led to countless losses for our justice system, the economy and democracy. And that is not trifling.

Judge Sergio Moro, who became famous by taking up the standard in the fight against corruption, ever more wallowing in the mud. His accomplices, such the Federal Supreme Court, are starting to abandon “Moro-Mania”, timidly.

The Federal Supreme Court prohibited the ‘forceful arrests’ that Moro used and abused, including against ex-President Lula. On the eve of voting on this authoritarian rubbish of forceful arrest, the jurist Técio Lins e Silva gave a strong performance in the plenary session of the Court.

Técio spoke of the embarrassment of taking an innocent Brazilian by force, as happened in the military dictatorship, to make a statement as Moro did with Lula, and with the journalist, Eduardo Guimarães, amongst others. Watch the entire defence by Técio in the STF, denouncing ‘forceful arrests’ (6).

Técio spoke of families who hired him professionally seeking redress to face this authoritarian rubbish that Moro used against innocent people, exposing them to ridicule, to being taken from their homes by the police.

Lava Jato, led by Moro, is accused by the Clube de Engenharia, Fiseng, Aepet, FUP and FNP of destroying the national engineering and shipbuilding industry (2 to 5). Lava Jato, as the fight against corruption, alleging overbilling, cancelled various projects, amongst them the Ceara and Maranhão refinery and halted the Comperj project.

Look, if someone really wanted to fight corruption, rather than sinking the country and favouring the competition abroad, they would have to punish the management, even imprison them, but they would keep the projects going, because in the end the ones who paid for all this were the workers. That is why Lava Jato is responsible for most of the 13 million unemployed.

Furthermore, Moro, in charge of Lava Jato, was an accomplice of the PSDB party in Petrobras. In November 2016, I denounced the omission of Lava Jato formally to the Federal Prosecution Service (MPF) in relation to the criminal management of Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Pedro Parente at Petrobras, with no response to this day.  See the denunciation in full (7).

Besides the criminal support of the media, principally the Globo network, which gave an award to Moro, as well as an award from the Brazil-United States Chamber of Commerce. Perhaps it was payback, as Lava Jato, headed by Moro, was omissive too when the neoliberal PSDB party supporter and head of Petrobras, Pedro Parente, paid R$ 10 million to American shareholders, even without Petrobras having been found culpable (9,10).

On the ruling of Moro, the thieves at Petrobras are serving their time at home, in true leisure clubs, built with the money they stole, amongst others: the ex-director of Petrobras, Paulo Roberto Costa; Fernando Baiano, lobbyist for the PMDB; Sérgio Machado, ex-president of Transpetro, a subsidiary of Petrobras and the money-launderer Alberto Youssef. Astounding! Youssef is at home despite being convicted to 82 years and 8 months in prison (1).

To favour the thieves convicted in Lava Jato even further, Moro :

“Prohibited the use of evidence obtained in Operation Lava Jato against those who made plea bargains and companies that recognised the crimes and who came to collaborate with the prosecutors in the investigations, with the decision affecting the AGU (Federal Attorney-General), the CGU (Federal Comptroller-General), Cade (Administrative Economic Defence Council), the Central Bank, the Federal Revenue Service and the TCU (Federal Accounts Tribunal)” (12)

Moro, besides discrediting the justice system in our country, their practices are criticised even by Pope Francisco, who said in a sermon:

“Obscure conditions have been created to convict one person. The media start speaking badly about people, the people who run things; with slander and defamation of these people who have been stained. Then comes the Justice system, who convict them, and in the end, a coup is implemented” (Francisco)” (13).

To leave no doubt about the dissatisfaction with the justice system in Brazil and the imprisonment of Lula, the head of the Roman Catholic church also sent an emissary  to Brazil, the country with the most Catholics in the world, to visit Lula, but who was barred from doing so, can you guess by whom? By Judge Sergio Moro!

I close with a declaration by Técio Lins e Silva to the STF, remembering the lawyer Sobral Pinto (6). Remembering, even though he was a conservative, Sobral Pinto defended the communist Senator Luis Carlos Prestes, imprisoned by the military dictatorship. According to Técio, at a certain time in a session of the Superior Military Tribunal, Sobral Pinto said: “I will denounce them to the country!” The president of the Military Tribunal then ordered him to be arrested. So I close with a message from the great Sobral Pinto to lawyers: “The law is not a profession for cowards!”

Source:
1 – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzFEQYt0cA

2 – https://jornalggn.com.br/noticia/para-engenheiros-lava-jato-promovo-desmonte-da-industria-nacional

3 – https://jornalggn.com.br/noticia/documentario-mostra-como-a-lava-jato-destruiu-a-economia-em-poucos-meses

4 – https://jornalggn.com.br/noticia/para-engenheiros-lava-jato-promovo-desmonte-da-industria-nacional

5 – http://www.aepet.org.br/w3/index.php/artigos/noticias-em-destaque/item/919-lava-jato-e-desmonte-do-pre-sal-a-combinacao-que-levou-o-rio-a-falencia

6 – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZWsBq4pvgo

7 – http://www.fnpetroleiros.org.br/noticias/3901/petroleiro-denuncia-a-operacao-lava-jato-ao-mpf-veja-na-integra-teor-da-denuncia-protocolada-ontem

8 – https://oglobo.globo.com/brasil/moro-ve-premio-como-reconhecimento-privado-anti-corrupcao-22686705

9 – https://www.brasil247.com/pt/247/artigos/174167/Moro-e-o-pr%C3%AAmio-da-Globo.htm

10 – http://www.redebrasilatual.com.br/politica/2018/02/parlamentares-vao-a-justica-contra-entrega-de-r-10-bi-por-presidente-da-petrobras

11 –  http://www.diariodepernambuco.com.br/app/noticia/politica/2016/07/10/interna_politica,654284/delatores-cumprem-prisao-domiciliar-em-mansoes-e-coberturas.shtml

12 –  https://www.brasil247.com/pt/247/parana247/358196/Moro-usa-lei-dos-EUA-para-blindar-delatores.htm

13 – – https://jornalggn.com.br/noticia/criam-se-condicoes-obscuras-para-condenar-a-pessoa-disse-o-papa

Rio de Janeiro, 15 June 2018.

Author: Emanuel Cancella, OAB/RJ 75.300, ex-president of Sindipetro-RJ, founder and ex- director of the Comando Nacional dos Petroleiros, of FUP and founder and coordinator of FNP, ex-national director of Dieese, and author of the book “A Outra Face de Sérgio Moro” which can be purchased at: http://emanuelcancella.blogspot.com.br/2017/07/a-outra-face-de-sergio-moro-pontos-de.html.

(Esse relato pode ser reproduzido livremente)
See the video of this post at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9KYD5iDVb4

Dilma declared innocent:

aves imperialistas-640x858
DCM

Purchase of Pasadena refinery: declared innocent in TCU investigation.

Obstruction of Lava Jato: declared innocent in PF investigation.

Money abroad: declared innocent in MPF investigation.

Fiscal manoeuvres: declared innocent in MPF investigation.

Abuse of power: declared innocent in TSE investigation.

WHERE DID THE HATE COME FROM!!!

1) Dilma vetoed the readjustment of 40% to the salaries of the judiciary (irritating the Justice arm).

2) Dilma vetoed the employment Law reform and approval of outsourcing deregulation (irritating the business and Fiesp).

3) Dilma vetoed the private electoral campaign financing (irritating those benefiting from bribes).

4) Dilma gave free reign to the Federal Police and did not interfere in the investigations (irritating the corrupt Congressmen and Senators).

5) Dilma refused to negotiate with Cunha, Leader of Congress (irritating the 300 Congressmen he sustained).

6) Dilma did not accept the handing over of Brazilian oil to foreigners (irritating the USA).

7) Dilma did not accept the privatizing the little that was left of publicly held Brazilian assets (irritating the holders of economic power supported by the neoliberal right).

8 Dilma did not accept forgiving the R$ 2 billion debt for health plans with the government (irritating the powerful in the private health insurance sector).

9) Dilma did not accept forgiving the debt of football clubs with the government (irritating the Brazilian Football Confederation).

10) Dilma did not accept forgiving the millionaire debt of TV channels, especially Globo, with the government (irritating the media barons, especially the Marinho family).

11) Dilma decreed that state banks lower their interest rate below the Selic (irritating rentista and speculative capital)

Do you understand where the hate arose and resides?…”

Walter Gadelha

(public domain)

THOSE WHO WORE THE YELLOW SHIRT AT THE WRONG TIME WERE IRRITATED ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY?

Pro-impeachment demo
vermelho.org.br

Comentários a uma sentença: o Caso Lula

Do Rede Brasil Atual

A sentença proferida pelo juiz Sérgio Moro contra o ex-presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva é tema do livro Comentários a uma sentença anunciada: o Processo Lula. Editado pela Frente Brasil de Juristas pela Democracia em defesa do Devido Processo Legal, o livro de 542 páginas, está disponível para download em português.

Comentarios-a-Uma-Sentenca-Anunciada

São 103 artigos escritos por 121 autores. Entre eles, Eugênio Aragão, Pedro Estevam Serrano, Wadih Damous, Celso Antônio Bandeira de Mello e Tarso Genro.

O documento jurídico é resultado de um movimento de juristas brasileiros que examinaram cuidadosamente a sentença proferida por Sérgio Moro no âmbito do processo que tramitou na 13ª Vara Federal de Curitiba, no caso que ficou conhecido como “tríplex do Guarujá”.

Os autores fazem um exame técnico da condenação, baseadas em meras convicções de um processo bastante problemático sob qualquer ângulo – e diagnosticam o uso da Justiça com objetivos políticos. Além de um criterioso exame da ciência penal, o livro é o que chamam de Carta Compromisso com a Cidadania, a Democracia e o Estado de Direito.

Da apresentação do livro:
Comentários a uma sentença: o Caso Lula” é talvez o mais importante documento jurídico publicado no Brasil em décadas. A presente coletânea de artigos nasceu de um movimento espontâneo e bastante significativo de juristas brasileiros que examinaram cuidadosamente a sentença proferida no âmbito do processo que tramitou na 13ª Vara Federal de Curitiba, no caso que ficou conhecido na mídia como o do “tríplex do Guarujá”.

Para além do caráter inédito da condenação criminal de um ex-Presidente da República em circunstâncias políticas em tese não comparáveis às das ditaduras brasileiras do século passado, a sentença, que em larga medida era aguardada como desfecho não surpreendente deste processo criminal, provocou imediata reação entre os que a leram comprometidos unicamente com o propósito de tentar entender os motivos pelos quais Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva está sendo punido pela prática dos crimes de corrupção passiva e lavagem de ativos de origem ilícita.

A certeza da condenação era fato. Admiradores e opositores do ex-presidente sabiam que não haveria outro veredito. A dúvida residia em conhecer as razões da condenação, exigência normativa da Constituição de 1988 que, pelas inevitáveis repercussões políticas do mencionado processo, mostraram o acerto do Constituinte de 1987-1988 ao elevar a fundamentação das decisões ao patamar de garantia constitucional do processo.

Apenas recentemente, depois de vinte anos de intensa batalha jurídica protagonizada por Fernando Fernandes, por coincidência advogado de Paulo Tarciso Okamoto, que neste caso do “tríplex do Guarujá” figura como réu ao lado do ex-presidente Lula, logrou-se cumprir decisão do Supremo Tribunal Federal, dando a conhecer os áudios dos julgamentos que o Superior Tribunal Militar (STM) realizou durante a ditadura de 1964-1985.

Os referidos julgamentos, tornados públicos agora, revelam as virtudes democráticas da publicidade do processo e da motivação das decisões. Frases do tipo “Eu vou tomar uma decisão revolucionária, deixando de lado a lei, porque pela lei não se pode condená-lo de maneira nenhuma”, ditas nos julgamentos, pelas mais altas autoridades judiciárias militares e civis, em um ambiente de segredo, hoje são conhecidas de todos os que se derem ao trabalho de ouvir os áudios daquelas sessões.

A motivação das decisões e a publicidade dos julgamentos são as armas pacíficas do Estado de Direito contra arbítrios e abusos, além de proporcionarem aos tribunais a oportunidade de uma maior qualidade e eficiência na tarefa de corrigir sentenças consideradas injustas, malgrado proferidas com apoio em sincera crença de que o direito foi aplicado ao caso concreto.
Ademais, o trabalho dos juízes, como expressão de atividade republicana regulada por um conjunto escrupuloso de regras jurídicas materiais e processuais, está sujeito a ser conhecido e avaliado não somente pelas partes destinatárias diretas da sentença. Cada pessoa, interessada na sorte de seu semelhante submetido a um processo criminal, dispõe de meios e recursos para promover uma verdadeira arqueologia das razões pelas quais alguém é condenado ou absolvido.

A publicidade do processo e a motivação das decisões funcionam como escudos contra aquele tipo de justificação acima referido, frequente à época no STM, próprio dos julgamentos políticos. Em casos no quais a condição de processo político não é encoberta pela forma criminal com que se apresentam, é por meio do escrutínio das razões do magistrado que a cidadania se sente protegida ou ameaçada.

Se os motivos de eventual condenação correspondem ao que prevê o corpus jurídico vigente e a lei penal está sendo aplicada em conformidade com o entendimento dominante acerca do conjunto de conceitos e noções produzidos pela chamada dogmática penal no Brasil, há de se presumir justificável a sentença e, assim, o seu acerto dependerá da correção do juízo do magistrado acerca da avaliação da prova, que deve ter sido produzida em um ambiente de rigorosa observância das regras do devido processo legal.

No entanto, se os conceitos e noções canônicos do direito penal brasileiro são afastados e, além disso, as garantias do devido processo são vulneradas, recorrendo o juiz a critérios de avaliação da prova e a outras práticas processuais no mínimo altamente discutíveis, o ordinário converte-se em exceção e os sinais de alerta, na defesa do Estado de Direito, imediatamente devem ser acionados.

Na hipótese há expressivo consenso de que o direito estrangeiro aparentemente substituiu o nosso, operando-se o fenômeno que Elisabetta Grande denomina de circulação simbólica de modelos jurídicos oriundos de diferentes âmbitos da cultura jurídica e de diferentes áreas do próprio direito.

O manejo dos conceitos e noções seguiu por essa trilha na condenação, reverberando convicções particulares e presunções formuladas em matéria penal em desconformidade com a análise de fatos apoiada em provas.

Embora se trate de simples apresentação do livro, não custa esclarecer o leitor acerca do significado, em termos de perigo para as liberdades individuais, de converter a exceção em regra, como em minha opinião fica claro na sentença tratar-se da opção do magistrado. Sobre o assunto sublinha Janaína Matida:
“A presunção judicial não é outra coisa senão o raciocínio sobre os fatos realizado pelo julgador; é o que se espera existir em sistemas jurídicos nos quais seja vigente a diretiva de livre e racional valoração, pois cabe ao juiz valorar as provas como informações suficientes (ou não) para a determinação da ocorrência dos fatos sob discussão. Sua qualidade está diretamente vinculada à generalização empírica por ele selecionada; logo se a generalização não é universal, ela, por definição suporta a possibilidade de exceções. Portanto, a construção do raciocínio deverá cuidar de demonstrar que o caso individual é regra e não exceção.”

O raciocínio condenatório que se apoia na exceção, recorre retoricamente a modelos jurídicos estrangeiros e traduz indevidamente conceitos penais – como salta aos olhos na condenação do ex-presidente por corrupção – fazendo letra morta da advertência da impossibilidade de transplantes do gênero, haveria de provocar vívida reação entre os estudiosos do direito.

O verdadeiro escrete de juristas, professoras e professores, advogados e intelectuais que seguiam de perto o processo, mobilizou-se ao constatar a excepcionalidade do estilo e dos argumentos empregados pelo juiz criminal na mencionada decisão.

Assim, o processo todo – e não somente a sentença – foi passado a limpo nos artigos que o leitor tem em mãos e que são de exclusiva responsabilidade de cada autor.

A centena de textos esmiúça o procedimento, esclarece que regras efetivamente estão em vigor e como incidem no caso concreto. Na opinião dos autores dos artigos estas regras não foram observadas e a sua não observância levou a que se proferisse uma decisão injusta.

Releva notar que em tempos de julgamento público e correspondente publicidade da motivação não há mais espaço para deixar de aplicar a lei para condenar.

Algo do gênero, portanto, subverte a lógica e seria dificilmente aceitável ainda mais neste período de instabilidade política e insegurança jurídica. Interrogar cada argumento, indagar de sua adequação aos procedimentos legais e à interpretação corrente configurou o método que autoras e autores utilizaram para verificar se e em que medida foi violado ou respeitado o devido processo legal.
A probabilidade de condenação do ex-presidente Lula e a sua confirmação são muito mais do que meras convicções de um processo bastante problemático sob qualquer ângulo.

O leitor tem consigo mais do que a obra de cento e vinte e um autores, retratada em cento e um artigos que submetem todos os aspectos da longa sentença ao criterioso exame que a ciência penal, o direito constitucional e outras áreas do saber consideram fundamentais para afirmar o Estado de Direito no Brasil.

“Comentários a uma sentença: o Caso Lula” é uma espécie de Carta Compromisso com a Cidadania, a Democracia e o Estado de Direito.

Confiar que os tribunais farão justiça a Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva é acreditar que a máxima dos julgamentos dos anos 70, no STM – “Eu vou tomar uma decisão revolucionária, deixando de lado a lei, porque pela lei não se pode condená-lo de maneira nenhuma” – está definitivamente sepultada entre nós. Se não há crimes, e crimes não há, a absolvição é a única decisão possível.